Those Who Use PEDs Are Not Just Cheats...
They're criminals. So says Canadian pro Will Routley http://www.vancouversun.com/sports/Whistler+cyclist+Will+Routley+says+competitors+used+PEDs+aren+just+cheaters+they+criminals/7502237/story.html?fb_action_ids=367611136659664&fb_action_types=og.recommends&fb_source=other_multiline&action_object_map=%7B%22367611136659664%22%3A123189001170015%7D&action_type_map=%7B%22367611136659664%22%3A%22og.recommends%22%7D&action_ref_map=[]
Apologies if this is in any of the other numerous threads, I haven't had a chance to catch up on them for a few days.
(Not sure why the link has gone funny!)
Apologies if this is in any of the other numerous threads, I haven't had a chance to catch up on them for a few days.
(Not sure why the link has gone funny!)
0
Posts
@gietvangent
Hmmm.....lets be honest, team owners, sponsors and organisers were hardly the innocents themselves in everything. See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil.
For every chemically assisted win, there is a clean rider who didn't get the win, prize money and the subsequent opportunities.
Look at the decent UK pros in the 90s who made the odd venture abroad and achieved decent results yet were overshadowed by the cheats. Riders such as Matt Stephens, Chris Walker, John Tanner, Chris Lillywhite, Keith Reynolds, Simeon Hempsall. As far as I am aware, all of these guys were clean, had some decent international results yet were not able to get on internationally. These are the guys who should be most aggrieved by the EPO generation as they have missed out on a more successful, better paid career and possibly a career in management / commentary after retirement.
Obtaining a pecuniary advantage by deception as it used to be in the UK. I think it's been repealed by the Fraud Act 2006 though. But you're spot on. I agree with the view. The athlete has deceived his/her Team and sponsor(s) by presenting themselves as clean riders when that is not the case.
So how do you apportion wins and rewards across not only a host of races where the victor hasn't been proved to cheat but across all the ones that have? How do you decide which riders the world over "never got the chance"? How do you compensate them for the endorsements and post-cyclin career they "should" have had?
You can't. It's an exercise in futility.
@gietvangent
I think people look at this slightly incorrectly. Although it is a sport and is there primarily for our entertainment, it is still a job. In your average day to day job, if you claimed money that wasn't rightfully yours (say in your pay packet), or invented a contract for a deal to gain extra commission or hit a bonus target, what would happen? At best you would be sacked and your company would claw back the money, or at worst (depending on the size of the sums involved) you would be arrested and charged.
As far as I am concearned the riders who doped were commiting fraud. They were wilfully breaking contracts, rules, guidelines, moral codes whatever you want to call it in order to get their extra commission. Lying and cheating for financial gain.
- @ddraver
It is a job. Big contracts are gained by winning races.
Would Armstrong be a multi millionaire if he had not "Won" 7 Tours?????? No, he would not. Would he have been sponsored by Nike, Trek, Oakley, etc etc without winning the Tour? Of course not.
Consequently he has defrauded these companies. This is probably why the Tour wants its money back.
You could argue he has defrauded all the people who bought yellow wrist bands on the strength of him being a "superhero, cancer survivor who can win the Tour".
All these bleeding hearts appearing now. get over themselves.
i feel better now
That'll be why everyone was / is openly doping then ? Why Bertie just rolled over and accepted he'd taken a wee drop of clen and Armstrong has held his hands up ?
If you stand up in public and declare "i'm clean" and you are offered a contract on that basis (regardless of whether your team, sponsors or fans know it's possibly / likely / certainly false), that is fraud. Your opinion as to whether that matters or not doesn't change that fact i'm afraid.
Exactly, I dont get this attitude of 'its sport, so therefore it cant be fraud.' If it could be considered fraudulent in any other industry and business, then it is sure as hell also fraudulent in sport. Riding a bike for a professional team is a JOB. Subject to the rules and regulations of all other jobs. Doping itself is now a criminal act in France. For me its simple, return the money you won while doping, or be charged with fraud.
I'm unsure if returning the money you stole means you get awa with stealing it in the first place.
@gietvangent
I think you fail to see the distinction between 'sport' and 'professional sport' and you seem to be generalizing and assuming all sport is the same.. in that its just the action of playing a game or whatever.
Think about committing fraud when playing monopoly at Christmas with your family, and committing fraud when running a £million property Business.
He's on the money re the dopers who are confessing now
How about the Skins case against UCI, isn't this the same argument being used just in reverse. I can't see Skins being successful.
I can see very little difference, besides the fact that alot of these guys have stood up in court and denied these allegations, which is Perjury.
If I cheat heavily enough in my area of work I can face fines and even jail time.
No different for sports people. The results of the races maybe seem trivial, but it's cheating in a professional context for money.
Spot on
Same should apply to race fixing
Yeah, just been reading that Vino thread. In football, rugby, cricket or the like in this country there are serious sanctions if you do anything what so ever to effect the score line or result. A prime example is Juventus in Italy who got relegated and stripped of all titles etc for match fixing and others banned and facing criminal charges. No idea why it is deemed ok in cycling. That being said, in Spain there is the 'suitcase of cash' i.e if you are Real Madrid and you need Barcelona to lose to Valencia in order for you to win the title, you are allowed to offer the Valencia team and manager a cash bonus if they win. Sum's up the Spaniards attitude to most sports really.
Wrong on all counts.
Its a professional occupation, and taking money under false pretenses, ie cheating, is fraud. Same as in any paid work.
I think the representations of riding clean to the wider world is one thing but if the employer is running an organised doping ring or turns a blind eye then there really is no fraud. The case of the employer defrauding a sponsor is more complicated. Organisers are different again, there are a whole series of post tour kermeeses (spelling) where the final result is decided before the event. It is, an entertainment business, not too dissimilar in its sporting plausibility to pro wrestling. No doubt there is skill and remarkable sporting skill but the pr road scene is about entertainment and sponsorship and has been since before it became what it is.
Certainly in the uk in employment terms at least, the contract of employment or for service might be what's written down but it will be what it actually is. (Autoclenz is the guide).
Cricket is very different from cycling which put bluntly " is just not cricket"
This is certainly the issue of it and one that never gets explored much until recently. Partly because... doped up cyclists are fun to watch
But by doping they are looking to deceive for cash that may have gone to another competitor who was clean. This of course is never been proven and it is possible that the doped up guy may have succeeded being clean. By doping they should forfeit this right to be recognised and awarded such prizes. There are similarities to someone to forges and embezzles mone to a cyclist who is tanked up looking to earn money. Sad thing about it is how common the practice got in cycling and not enough people stood up and said that this is wrong.
Now we are in a situation of saying to people... Ah don't worry about it everyone did it so it's ok forget about it we'll play nicely now.
I think if you are a M.P. that's exactly how it works
Might these "bleeding hearts" be similar in sentiment to those fools who historically dared question slavery?
Are these the same "bleeding hearts" who suggested that the term "conjugal rights" (now more commonly known, in the eyes of the law, as rape) might be a smoke-screen? Or maybe the same lot that said that the idea that perhaps environmental concern isn't just a load of hippie codswallop... or those that asked that maybe the Nazis might essentially be wrong-'uns... and any other issue that might be deemed namby-pamby libertarian pinko bullsh!t ("women voting!? Really, man - have you thought this through?")?
And are these "bleeding hearts" how you'd describe any fan of the sport who doesn't automatically come from the cynical stance that they're all at it: therefore you've got to get yours before you get got?
I'll admit that there have been times when I've wished folk weren't so hardline or black/white in their take on this matter (doping in cycling) - can't people just continue on with the traditional "it's part of the culture, historically and all that: now, can't we just see a damn good race?", etc, but the gaffe is blown; the game's over...it's the end of that scene, now - thank's very much, though.
Over time, there are mentalities that become known as "dinosaur", old-fashioned, or worse..."quaint". Jeremy Clarkson is a perfect example: he may have 2 million blokes guffawing at his brusque dismissals of the on-coming realities; but he's got 20 million people doing the "[email protected]" gesture everytime he opens his mouth...
A little balance is required.